Jenna Corderoy v The Information Commissioner & Anor

Jenna Corderoy v The Information Commissioner & Anor

The request for Prime Minister's ministerial diaries imposed an excessive and oppressive burden on the Cabinet Office, particularly given the sensitive nature of the information and the timing during the Covid-19 pandemic. The Commissioner was entitled to find the request vexatious under section 14(1) FOIA, and there was no error of law or wrongful exercise of discretion.

Parties
Appellant: Jenna Corderoy; First Respondent: The Information Commissioner; Second Respondent: The Cabinet Office
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Freedom of Information, Vexatious Requests, Public Interest, Ministerial Diaries, Covid 19 Pandemic
Information Rights Administrative Law Freedom of Information Vexatious Requests Public Interest Ministerial Diaries Covid 19 Pandemic

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jenna Corderoy

Appellant

The Information Commissioner

First Respondent

The Cabinet Office

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Cabinet Office was entitled to rely on section 14(1) FOIA to refuse the request for Prime Minister's ministerial diaries
  2. 2 Whether the request was vexatious under section 14(1) FOIA
  3. 3 Whether the Commissioner erred in law or exercised discretion wrongly

Ratio Decidendi

The request for Prime Minister's ministerial diaries imposed an excessive and oppressive burden on the Cabinet Office, particularly given the sensitive nature of the information and the timing during the Covid-19 pandemic. The Commissioner was entitled to find the request vexatious under section 14(1) FOIA, and there was no error of law or wrongful exercise of discretion.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed